Law & Tech Roundup
Our RSS readers are exploding with law and technology news this week. Here are some of the highlights:
Microsoft (and its European customers) are having a good day. European regulators finally dropped their antitrust suit against Microsoft in exchange for the software giant’s agreement to give European Windows users a choice of 11 rival web browsers rather than limiting them to Internet Explorer. Unfortunately for domestic Windows users, Microsoft apparently has no plans to extend this offer beyond the European Union. Many are heralding this as a huge victory for EU Windows users, but given how easy it is to install competing browsers on a PC these days, it is a little tough to see what all the fuss is about. For an interesting analysis of the issues, check out this article from the Seattle PI.
Intel’s day is not going quite so well. The blogosphere is exploding with reports about the FTC’s commencement of an antitrust suit against the chip0maker today accusing it of “stifl[ing] competition” by systematically blocking its rivals access to the market. What does that mean? According to the FTC’s complaint, Intel “threatened to and did increase prices, terminate product and technology collaborations, shut off supply, and reduce marketing support to OEMs that purchased too many products from Intel’s competitors.” Read about it here, here, here, and here.
Texters take heed: On Monday the Supreme Court granted certiorari on City of Ontario v. Quon, 08-1332. Quon presents the issue of whether government employers can read text messages that their employees send and receive on workplace texting devices. In this case, a police officer from California frequently sent personal and sexually explicit text messages from a pager provided by the police department. The department’s wireless provider turned over the transcripts of the messages to the department – a move that the civil-rights friendly Ninth Circuit called an unreasonable search. The Supreme Court will review the Ninth Circuit’s decision and decide whether the officer had a legitimate expectation of privacy in his text messages. Although this case arose in the context of government employment, it is sure to have implications for private companies as well. Oral arguments are likely to take place this spring, so stay tuned. And regardless of which way the high court comes out, it is probably wise to keep your private messages off of an employer-owned device.
Important Info for Members of the State Bar of Wisconsin
At Fastcase, we are constantly striving to improve our product in order to serve you better. We recently made some adjustments to the back end of our site that may require members of the State Bar of Wisconsin who use Internet Explorer to adjust their browser settings. In order to ensure uninterrupted access to Fastcase, please follow these simple steps:
(1) Select Internet Options from the Tools menu in your browser.
(2) Then select the Security tab and click on the icon for Trusted Sites.
(3) Click the Sites button and add “https://apps.fastcase.com/” as a trusted site.
(4) Close the dialog boxes, close your browser and then re-open it. Attempt to login to Fastcase again.
As always, feel free to contact Fastcase Customer Support (1-866-773-2782, support@fastcase.com) with any questions.
Why Aren’t NFL Instant Replays Reviewed De Novo?
Duke Law professor Joseph Blocher asks a great question: Why Aren’t Instant Replays Reviewed De Novo?
He argues that unlike trial courts, umpires and referees operating in real time are not in the best place to make the correct call. After all, in sports, the reviewing decision-maker is viewing the play multiple times, from many angles, and in slow motion.
Cited in the blog post is a forthcoming Indiana Law Review article by Chad M. Oldfather and Matthew M Fernholz of Marquette University Law School: Comparative Procedure on a Sunday Afternoon: Instant Replay in the NFL as a Process of Appellate Review.
Check out the comments to Blocher’s post for extra entertainment. Pretty good.
Source: PrawfsBlawg
USPTO Announces "Green" Initiative
The USPTO announced on Monday that it would begin a pilot program to accellerate the examination of patent applications for “green” technologies. According to the USPTO “The new initiative, coming days before the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, will accelerate the development and deployment of green technology, create green jobs, and promote U.S. competitiveness in this vital sector.”
If all goes well, the average time it takes to patent a qualifying “green” technology will be reduced by about a year. That may not sound like much, but imagine what one-year head start in the market could mean for consumer technologies like automobiles.
What types of technologies will qualify for expedited treatment? You can find the full list of eligible classfications in the Federal Register. Some notable entries include: human-powered vehicles, hybrid-powered vehicles, wind-powered ships, alternative irrigation techniques, and water conservation systems. Although the list of classifications is suprisingly detailed, with so much at stake, you can be assured that this is a question that will be the soon be the subject of litigation.
Did you know: This move — providing regulatory incentives to entice the industry to focus research and development — is not without precedent. Back in 1997, Congress enacted a law that provided marketing incentives — specifically 6 months of marketing exclusivity — to drug manufacturers who conduct studies of drugs in children. This law, commonly known as the pediatric exclusivity provision, was part of the Food and Drug Modernization Act. Congress felt that incentives were needed to produce safe and effective pediatric drugs because pharmaceutical firms were reluctant to perform clinical trials on children because the pediatric market is often small relative to the adult market as well as the difficulty of obtaining informed consent for pediatric testing.
Is it working? Well, the answer to that question depends on what you think of the 172 drugs that have been granted exclusivity under this program.
.
Business Intelligence and People Finder Now Available on Fastcase!
We are delighted to announce our partnership with ReferenceLegal, the leading provider of business and consumer intelligence to the legal profession. ReferenceLegal’s database contains information on more than 14 million U.S. businesses, 210 million U.S. residents, and 855,000 U.S. health care providers.
Fastcase subscribers can now harness the power of ReferenceLegal’s vast public records database to run conflict checks, perform corporate due diligence, screen potential clients, opponents, and business partners, locate consulting experts and expert witnesses, and much more.
Access ReferenceLegal Through Fastcase
You can find ReferenceLegal under our Public Records search link. Simply select Public Records from the Search menu and click on the ReferenceLegal logo. (Alternatively, you can choose the Search Public Records link on the Quick Case Law Search page.) From here, you can subscribe to ReferenceLegal online on an annual or a monthly basis and instantly start researching. You can even take ReferenceLegal for a test drive by signing up for a free trial.